Topple tower

ABSTRACT

My invention relates to military engineering. More specifically, it concerns obstacles and barriers designed to halt or delay the advance of hostile military forces. My invention is designed primarily to stop or impede tanks and other armored vehicles, but it also incorporates antipersonnel features. Its main advantage lies in that it is especially suited for construction in peacetime since it requires very little maintenance, poses no danger to inhabitants and negligible inconvenience to normal peacetime movement or economic use of real estate in the area in which employed. It is designed to be quickly converted into an obstacle which is superior to types currently in use or planned.

1 Aug. 21, 1973 TOPPLE TOWER Robert B. Bocktlng, 8510 Pelham Rd., Bethesda, Md.

22 Filed: Nov. 17, 1971 21 Appl.No.:199,592

[76] Inventor:

Primary ExaminerMervin Stein Assistant Examiner-Alex Grosz Attorney-Robert l. Lainof [57] ABSTRACT My invention relates to military engineering. More specifically, it concerns obstacles and barriers designed to halt or delay the advance of hostile military forces. My invention is designed primarily to stop or impede tanks and other armored vehicles, but it also incorporates antipersonnel features. Its main advantage lies in that it is especially suited for construction in peacetime since it requires very little maintenance, poses no danger to inhabitants and negligible inconvenience to normal peacetime movement or economic use of real estate in the area in which employed. It is designed to be quickly converted into an obstacle which is superior to types currently in use or planned.

3 Claims, 5 Drawing Figures Patented Aug. 21,

v QII4-IAIAIA 5% m /C! W FIGURE 4 FlGU 1 TOPPLE TOWER SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION I shall call my invention the Topple Tower since this describes the form of the structure and the falling action by which it is put into effect or executed."

The substance of my invention is best understood by reference to the accompanying drawings. FIG. 1 shows the tower in the upright position. This is the position in which it is constructed, and in which it remains unless or until felled into a horizontal position as an obstacle. In its preferred form, it is fabricated of steel reinforced concrete on a reinforced concrete or masonry foundation. It consists of an elongated trunk-like structure with a plurality of projecting limbs as shown in the drawing. In its preferred form, the towers height may be expected to be some 70 to 100 feet, but may be larger or smaller. Other proportions are about as shown on the drawings, in which the tower itself is about 6 feet in thickness, tapering to about 4 feet at the top. In this example the projecting limbs are shown about 8 feet long, about 4 feet thick where they join the central structure, and taper to about 2 feet thickness at their extremeties.

The tower remains in the upright position until the obstacle is needed. Should an enemy attack be launched or known to be imminent, and upon the decision of the commander of friendly forces; the obstacle is quickly executed by detonating an explosive charge in a chamber or chambers which are built into the base of the tower. To facilitate felling the tower and causing it to fall in the desired direction, the base of the tower is constructed in two or more separate parts. See FIG. 2 and 3 which depict a preferred form of the tower base showing the chambers for explosive. Chambers are indicated by the letter A. When an explosive charge is detonated in the chamber or chambers, part of the tower base is destroyed causing the tower to topple or fall in the direction of the portion of the base destroyed by the explosive charge. This permits the structure to block the area or passage desired. In many cases, a series of towers will be constructed so that when felled they will either join or overlap to form a continuous barrier across a threatened area or avenue of approach.

As FIG. 1 indicates (in the preferred configuration) the trunk 10 of the tower tapers from base to top. Along its length, at intervals are groups of projecting limbs 11 set at approximately right angles to each other and to the trunk of the tower. These limbs are of the same material as the tower and are employed for two reasons: firstly, the limbs projecting from the tower on the sides toward which it falls are designed to be driven into the earth by the weight of the tower structure and the force of its fall, thus anchoring the obstacle in place and rendering its removal more difiicult. Secondly, those limbs on the opposite sides will be projecting upward and outward extending the height and breadth of the obstacle, rendering it more difficult to surmount by any vehicle or mechanical device. Moreover, attachmerits are to be built into the structure, in the form of metal studs, rings or clamps, to which coils of barbed wire are attached. The reinforced concrete limbs, mentioned above, serve to support and stabilize the aforementioned barbed wire entanglements which add to the antipersonnel value of the obstacle and inhibit enemy breaching operations.

FIG. 4 shows the tower in vertical cross section and a typical location for the attachments for barbed wire coils. Attachments are indicated by the letter B.

FIG. 5 shows an end-on cross sectional view of the tower after it is felled into its position as an obstacle. The lower projecting limbs are shown imbedded in the earth and indicated by the letter C." The limbs from the other side of the structure are shown projecting upward and outward and are indicated by the letter D. Coils of barbed wire are shown in the preferred position at the junction of the limbs along the trunk of the tower and indicated by the letter B. The height of the obstacle as shown is about 15 feet, but nothing used in this description is intended to limit the total size or proportions used in this type obstacle.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION Military engineers customarily employ many types of obstacles to stop or delay the attack of enemy forces. In more recent times the most vexing problem is that of providing an effective barrier against enemy tanks. One of the most critical aspects of this is posed by the threat of surprise attack which would severely restrict the time available to construct presently known types of obstacles.

Present types of obstacles such as abatis, minefields, road craters and demolition of bridges are not readily adaptable to peacetime construction because of one or more disadvantages such as high maintenance requirements, interference with movement and transportation, desruption of the economic use of land, the rendering of considerable areas hazardous to persons and domestic animals and other characteristics which limit their use to certain locations.

Army Field Manuals provide descriptions of currently used barriers and obstacles. In order to provide a frame of reference for appreciation of my invention I will enumerate the principal disadvantages of present obstacle types.

Antitank ditch this obstacle is an obstruction to peacetime movement if constructed before hostilities. It interferes with land usage and moreover is relatively ineffective as a military obstacle since it is easily overcome by use of portable bridging.

Dragons teeth These are likewise obstacles to peacetime movement and land use and since they are relatively low they may be breached by portable bridging or ramped over with earth by a bulldozer.

Minefield This obstacle removes a large area of land from peacetime use. The most thorough precautions cannot guarantee the prevention of accidents. High maintenance costs are inherent and a loss of effectiveness occurs when the ground freezes during winter months or when the field is covered with heavy snow.

Abatis This obstacle can only be constructed where trees of proper size exist and it requires considerable time for preparation.

Crater This obstacle requires careful site selection. There are a limited number of places where a crater can be effective. It is only useful in places where adjacent terrain conditions prevent passage around the obstacle.

Most of these obstacle types are unsuitable for emplacement before hostilities for various reasons and since their preparation is time consuming it is unlikely that they could be emplaced in an emergency. The

erection of an effective barrier using present obstacle types requires several days and the efforts of many hundreds of men.

The intended mode of employment of my invention consists of the construction of a series of towers designed as I have described during peacetime. These would be located so that when felled they would block roads at defiles. A complete barrier system would employ a series of towers located so that when felled they would form a series of continuous obstacles, blocking all tank passable terrain. Generally, such a barrier system would be emplaced in the vicinity of and along a threatened frontier such as that between East and West Germany, between North and South Korea, along the borders of Israel, Northern Greece, Eastern Turkey or any similar boundary between potentially hostile states and nations having mutual defense treaties with the United States.

The advantages of the obstacle, the invention of which I am disclosing is that once constructed it remains in place, ready for use, indefinitely, with virtually no maintenance, and no inconvenience or danger to persons or property. In the event of an attack the felling of the tower or towers will require but a few minutes.

If a period of tension precedes an attack, a state of high readiness can be attained by pre-placing the explosive charges, locking or sealing them in the chambers described. When the attack occurs, the charges can be fired electrically from a remote location if desired.

While the location and purpose of the towers can probably not be kept secret from a potential enemy this is not a serious drawback from a tactical point of view. From a political viewpoint the existence of such a potential barrier may deter aggression by reducing the chances of a successful surprise attack.

The construction of the towers involves commonly employed engineering techniques. A sturdy foundation is constructed, the reinforcing steel is installed and forms for the concrete are erected on the usual way. A dense concrete is poured into the forms, probably employing a bucket crane as in the construction of concrete dams or bridge piers. The concrete is allowed to cure and the forms are removed.

The efi'ectiveness of this obstacle stems firstly from the rapidity with which it may be executed and secondly from its size and design. It is massive, weighing many tons. Its protruding limbs are imbedded in the earth, rendering it nearly impossible to move. Other protruding limbs extend upward and outward, to a height and breadth of 15 or more feet. This renders it virtually impossible to surmount the obstacle with portable bridging. There are many recently developed items of tank mounted equipment designed to breach minefields and other present obstacles. None of these methods however is designed to cope with the type obstacle which I am proposing in this disclosure.

1 claim:

1. An upright tower adapted to be felled to provide a barrier to impede the movement of armored vehicles comprising an elongated trunk-like structure made of steel-reinforced concrete supported on a tower base, said elongated trunk being formed to include, at intervals along its length, groups of projecting limbs set at approximately a right angle to the axis of the trunk, said tower base including chamber means adapted to receive explosives for destroying a portion of the tower base to thereby fell the tower when the explosives are detonated.

2. A tower as recited in claim 1 in which said projecting limbs are positioned at approximately right angles to one another.

3. A tower as recited in claim 2 in which said base is constructed in two or more separate parts with at least one of said parts being formed with said chamber means for the reception of said explosives.

1! i l k 

1. An upright tower adapted to be felled to provide a barrier to impede the movement of armored vehicles comprising an elongated trunk-like structure made of steel-reinforced concrete supported on a tower base, said elongated trunk being formed to include, at intervals along its length, groups of projecting limbs set at approximately a right angle to the axis of the trunk, said tower base including chamber means adapted to receive explosives for destroying a portion of the tower base to thereby fell the tower when the explosives are detonated.
 2. A tower as recited in claim 1 in which said projecting limbs are positioned at approximately right angles to one another.
 3. A tower as recited in claim 2 in which said base is constructed in two or more separate parts with at least one of said parts being formed with said chamber means for the reception of said explosives. 